W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg-comments@w3.org > April to June 2007

Re: please reivew mobileOK Basic Tests 1.0

From: Sean Owen <srowen@google.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 00:37:58 -0400
Message-ID: <e920a71c0706142137n23770218q482ba396aba1bc09@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>
Cc: "Ben 'Cerbera' Millard" <cerbera@projectcerbera.com>, "mobileOK WG" <public-bpwg-comments@w3.org>

On 6/14/07, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> wrote:
> One problem is that the validator allows
> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" to be omitted for instance. Another
> problem is that authors write scripts that don't guarantee well-formed
> output. Yet another problem is that there are some differences between
> XHTML processed as HTML and XHTML processed as XML such as scripting,
> styling and XHTML syntax differences. In XHTML you can write <textarea/>
> in theory, but not when it's processed as HTML, etc.

You mention a problem with a validator, and that authors might not
generate well-formed XHTML. But the issue is the really last one that
you mention: whether well-formed, correctly delivered XHTML Basic can
be rendered by HTML parsers, since the former is what we're
recommending, and you're saying the latter is what devices really do.

You are right that there are differences, like that self-closing tags
don't work in HTML I believe. As far as I know none of these are
causing trouble for the HTML parsers in question.  Well, that is the
going assumption here, so it's definitely worth hearing where the
problems might be.

In point of fact, people write a bunch of mobile content in these
XHTML languages, and it works on these mobile browsers. Imperfectly
and all that -- that's why we're here. I think you can concoct cases
where you get into trouble vis-a-vis XHTML and HTML, but, I would be
surprised, and really want to know, if you can do so within the "keep
it simple" guidelines put forth by the BPWG.

Sean
Received on Friday, 15 June 2007 04:38:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:01:50 UTC